Two Senators want Antifa labled domestic terrorists

[Estanglia]

You don't see how labelling something as nebulous as "Antifa" a domestic terrorist group can be abused to suppress dissent?

No, I don't see how labeling a violent group that attempts to forcibly silence opposing views can be abused to suppress dissent.

Because there isn't one Antifa. At best, Antifa is a group of organisations referred to with one name because they all have the same goal: stop fascism. Here is where it can be abused because you can just chuck an antifascist group under the Antifa umbrella and call them terrorists even when they have done nothing wrong.

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

You don't see how labelling something as nebulous as "Antifa" a domestic terrorist group can be abused to suppress dissent?

No, I don't see how labeling a violent group that attempts to forcibly silence opposing views can be abused to suppress dissent.

No chance at all Trump supporters in government will hand out Antifa labels like Oprah.

Well, Trump and the vast majority of his supporters (myself included) value the freedom of speech and oppose fascism...

How does exercising the rights given by the constitution disrespect the constitution?

Um, please explain how exercising freedom of speech implies contempt for freedom of speech.

I'll give you an analogy:

Supposes a parent decides to give his/her three children some more freedoms. He/she decides to remove the curfew previously set upon the children. The first child doesn't exercise this new freedom and instead stays home at late-night. The second child does exercise this new freedom, but thanks his/her parent for it. The third child exercises this new freedom, but continues to call the parent "restrictive" and "unreasonable", and the freedom "not enough". Assume that the parent has been reasonable in all other aspects.

The first child would be the American who doesn't criticize his/her government. These kinds are rare, for the government consistently fluctuates in ideology. There is no need to revoke his/her freedom.
The second child would be the America who criticizes his/her government, but not the Constitution's First Amendment. These kinds are more common, ranging from reasonable liberals to reasonable conservatives. Assuming the second child does not cause, inflict, or recieve harm with the new freedom, the parent should not revoke it.
The third child would be the flag-burner: directly using given freedoms to attack them. It wouldn't be unreasonable for the parent to re-institute the third child's curfew.

Don't you think that assuming the parent is reasonable in all other aspects is kind of breaking the analogy here? The American government, in many ways, isn't reasonable nor fair to its own citizens. A more apt analogy would be the parent removing the curfew but then putting secret surveillance devices in the children's possessions.

[Strahcoin]

1. First of all, I was considering a hypothetical. I did not "admit" that antifa is not an organization. I said "even if". Second of all, not all terrorists belong to organizations. Lone terrorists exist, just as lone murderers or thieves exist.
2. The victim is often an innocent. If throwing a projectile at an innocent isn't unwarranted, nothing isn't.
(Not to mention the milkshake may ruin their clothing, or nobody made sure the victim wasn't lactose intolerant.)

1) My question still stands. Antifa isn't an organisation, at best it's a group of antifascist organisations. How exactly are you gonna label Antifa terrorists?
And if it's actually an organisation, prove it.

2) Hence the not necessarily. I wouldn't call it entirely unwarranted when a total jackass takes a milkshake to the face.

1. Simple. Every "person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims" should be labeled as one, just as sexual assaulters are labeled as "sexual assaulters". Increasing the police budget would help finding those people.
2. True... However, the few times bad people are attacked do not justify the many times innocents* are. Besides, calling the police to apprehend the bad person and give him/her a trial would be more just and fair.

*"Innocent" used in this context means a person who has not committed a crime or other immoral act.

[Estanglia]

1) My question still stands. Antifa isn't an organisation, at best it's a group of antifascist organisations. How exactly are you gonna label Antifa terrorists?
And if it's actually an organisation, prove it.

2) Hence the not necessarily. I wouldn't call it entirely unwarranted when a total jackass takes a milkshake to the face.

1. Simple. Every "person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims" should be labeled as one, just as sexual assaulters are labeled as "sexual assaulters". Increasing the police budget would help finding those people.

So, not the 'group' Antifa, just violent antifascists.

2. True... However, the few times bad people are attacked do not justify the many times innocents* are. Besides, calling the police to apprehend the bad person and give him/her a trial would be more just and fair.

*"Innocent" used in this context means a person who has not committed a crime or other immoral act.

Sure.

[Vassenor]

What has Trump done to earn our respect?

• Reduced unemployment levels to record lows
• Defeated ISIS
• Lowered taxes
• Started building the wall and consequently protecting honest American citizens from illegal immigrants
• Did not attempt to appease the fake news media
• ...And more, all while donating nearly all of his salary from being president.

There's a list here, in case you're curious.

>Defeated ISIS



>Lowered Taxes

For the rich. The average American hasn't actually benefited from the Cut Cut Cut Act.

>Started building The Wall

Uh, no, he hasn't, but keep telling yourself that.

>Did not attempt to appease the fake news media

If by that you mean screamed like a spoiled toddler every time some outlet said anything even slightly negative about him.

So no, not a whole lot to be worth repsecting.

[Vassenor]

Remember, throwing milkshakes at people is the worst terrorism possible.

It's rude, disrespectful, and unwarranted. Anyone with common sense knows this.

That doesn't make it terrorism.

[US-SSR]

Am I the only one seeing the irony in the fact that two Senators who think anyone who feels in the least threatened has the absolute right to shoot anyone else dead want to label people whose offenses amount to harassment and fisticuffs "domestic terrorists?"

[Greater vakolicci haven]

• Reduced unemployment levels to record lows
• Defeated ISIS
• Lowered taxes
• Started building the wall and consequently protecting honest American citizens from illegal immigrants
• Did not attempt to appease the fake news media
• ...And more, all while donating nearly all of his salary from being president.

There's a list here, in case you're curious.

>Defeated ISIS



>Lowered Taxes

For the rich. The average American hasn't actually benefited from the Cut Cut Cut Act.

>Started building The Wall

Uh, no, he hasn't, but keep telling yourself that.

>Did not attempt to appease the fake news media

If by that you mean screamed like a spoiled toddler every time some outlet said anything even slightly negative about him.

So no, not a whole lot to be worth repsecting.

Read linky, make better arguments.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

>Defeated ISIS



>Lowered Taxes

For the rich. The average American hasn't actually benefited from the Cut Cut Cut Act.

>Started building The Wall

Uh, no, he hasn't, but keep telling yourself that.

>Did not attempt to appease the fake news media

If by that you mean screamed like a spoiled toddler every time some outlet said anything even slightly negative about him.

So no, not a whole lot to be worth repsecting.

Read linky, make better arguments.

It is a Trump propaganda site. Not every fact there is going to be accurate. He did do some good things, but that man far from walks on water.

[Union of Sovereign States and Republics]

Read linky, make better arguments.

It is a Trump propaganda site. Not every fact there is going to be accurate. He did do some good things, but that man far from walks on water.

At least he made peace with North Korea, the boogeyman of our time.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

It is a Trump propaganda site. Not every fact there is going to be accurate. He did do some good things, but that man far from walks on water.

At least he made peace with North Korea, the boogeyman of our time.

It won't last as there really wasn't a deal. He also seems to love Kim's dictatorial rule, which is not a characteristic that should be welcomed in a U.S. President.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Read linky, make better arguments.

It is a Trump propaganda site. Not every fact there is going to be accurate. He did do some good things, but that man far from walks on water.

I've never said he did. He isn't the great satan either, however.

[Major-Tom]

A few people associated with a broad tent like ANTIFA do a few asinine things and they're domestic terrorists, but the alt-right gets a free pass when it comes to actual murders and calls for genocide.

Sounds about right, fucking christ.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

A few people associated with a broad tent like ANTIFA do a few asinine things and they're domestic terrorists, but the alt-right gets a free pass when it comes to actual murders and calls for genocide.

Sounds about right, fucking christ.

The alt-right is rightfully condemned by many, and we have alt-right murderers in prison.

[Strahcoin]

• Reduced unemployment levels to record lows
• Defeated ISIS
• Lowered taxes
• Started building the wall and consequently protecting honest American citizens from illegal immigrants
• Did not attempt to appease the fake news media
• ...And more, all while donating nearly all of his salary from being president.

There's a list here, in case you're curious.

>Defeated ISIS



>Lowered Taxes

For the rich. The average American hasn't actually benefited from the Cut Cut Cut Act.

>Started building The Wall

Uh, no, he hasn't, but keep telling yourself that.

>Did not attempt to appease the fake news media

If by that you mean screamed like a spoiled toddler every time some outlet said anything even slightly negative about him.

So no, not a whole lot to be worth repsecting.

1. Seriously, he has. While he hasn't obliterated every member of ISIS, he has certainly defeated them and liberated the territory they occupied.
2. My family is somewhere in the middle-class. My father said taxes have been lowered by Trump, even though it wasn't perfect. (Also, about half of Congress, the entity that writes the tax codes, is dominated by left-wing Democrats, so that would explain why income taxes aren't flat yet.) Moreover, the "rich" (aka those who work hard) were unfairly taxed before.
3. Then how do you explain this?
4. That "screaming like a spoiled toddler" is precisely why the hard-working Americans voted for him. They wanted someone who consistently spoke the truth from his heart, not someone who pretends to care for the people while accepting and paying dirty money to look good. (And must I say that CNN/MSNBC are the true screamers?)

Read linky, make better arguments.

It is a Trump propaganda site. Not every fact there is going to be accurate. He did do some good things, but that man far from walks on water.

The good things he did solved critical issues at the time. Also, remember that Congress has to write most of the bills before Trump passes them. Therefore, lots of negotiations were necessary.

At least he made peace with North Korea, the boogeyman of our time.

It won't last as there really wasn't a deal. He also seems to love Kim's dictatorial rule, which is not a characteristic that should be welcomed in a U.S. President.

I'm not entirely sure where you got that idea (probably from the fake news media), but Trump does not in any way love Kim's dictatorial rule. The peace was achieved through a show of strength. After all, Trump wasn't the one who paid money to Kim in hopes he would stop. Instead, in response to Kim threatening the United States, Trump countered that brilliantly - saying that he had a bigger button, which works. While some may call this tweet "risky", it actually scared the North Korean dictator into asking for negotiations; after all, our military is superior, and they don't want to risk a war against us while we're strong.

Here's an analogy: North Korea is the bully. America pre-2017 was the victim. America now is the victim willing to stand up for itself.

[Major-Tom]

A few people associated with a broad tent like ANTIFA do a few asinine things and they're domestic terrorists, but the alt-right gets a free pass when it comes to actual murders and calls for genocide.

Sounds about right, fucking christ.

The alt-right is rightfully condemned by many, and we have alt-right murderers in prison.

When the President mentioned that we have "fine people on many sides," or when several GOP congressmen have openly espoused ideas I would consider far-right, I don't think it's a stretch to say that the GOP's condemnations of the alt-right are half-assed at best, and completely disingenuous at worst.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

>Defeated ISIS



>Lowered Taxes

For the rich. The average American hasn't actually benefited from the Cut Cut Cut Act.

>Started building The Wall

Uh, no, he hasn't, but keep telling yourself that.

>Did not attempt to appease the fake news media

If by that you mean screamed like a spoiled toddler every time some outlet said anything even slightly negative about him.

So no, not a whole lot to be worth repsecting.

1. Seriously, he has. While he hasn't obliterated every member of ISIS, he has certainly defeated them and liberated the territory they occupied.
2. My family is somewhere in the middle-class. My father said taxes have been lowered by Trump, even though it wasn't perfect. (Also, about half of Congress, the entity that writes the tax codes, is dominated by left-wing Democrats, so that would explain why income taxes aren't flat yet.) Moreover, the "rich" (aka those who work hard) were unfairly taxed before.
3. Then how do you explain this?
4. That "screaming like a spoiled toddler" is precisely why the hard-working Americans voted for him. They wanted someone who consistently spoke the truth from his heart, not someone who pretends to care for the people while accepting and paying dirty money to look good. (And must I say that CNN/MSNBC are the true screamers?)

It is a Trump propaganda site. Not every fact there is going to be accurate. He did do some good things, but that man far from walks on water.

The good things he did solved critical issues at the time. Also, remember that Congress has to write most of the bills before Trump passes them. Therefore, lots of negotiations were necessary.

It won't last as there really wasn't a deal. He also seems to love Kim's dictatorial rule, which is not a characteristic that should be welcomed in a U.S. President.

I'm not entirely sure where you got that idea (probably from the fake news media), but Trump does not in any way love Kim's dictatorial rule. The peace was achieved through a show of strength. After all, Trump wasn't the one who paid money to Kim in hopes he would stop. Instead, in response to Kim threatening the United States, Trump countered that brilliantly - saying that he had a bigger button, which works. While some may call this tweet "risky", it actually scared the North Korean dictator into asking for negotiations; after all, our military is superior, and they don't want to risk a war against us while we're strong.

Here's an analogy: North Korea is the bully. America pre-2017 was the victim. America now is the victim willing to stand up for itself.

I am well aware of Trump's tweets against "rocket man." After the summit however, Trump seems to developed an affinity for the dictator.

[Highever]

1. Seriously, he has. While he hasn't obliterated every member of ISIS, he has certainly defeated them and liberated the territory they occupied.
2. My family is somewhere in the middle-class. My father said taxes have been lowered by Trump, even though it wasn't perfect. (Also, about half of Congress, the entity that writes the tax codes, is dominated by left-wing Democrats, so that would explain why income taxes aren't flat yet.) Moreover, the "rich" (aka those who work hard) were unfairly taxed before.
3. Then how do you explain this?
4. That "screaming like a spoiled toddler" is precisely why the hard-working Americans voted for him. They wanted someone who consistently spoke the truth from his heart, not someone who pretends to care for the people while accepting and paying dirty money to look good. (And must I say that CNN/MSNBC are the true screamers?)


The good things he did solved critical issues at the time. Also, remember that Congress has to write most of the bills before Trump passes them. Therefore, lots of negotiations were necessary.


I'm not entirely sure where you got that idea (probably from the fake news media), but Trump does not in any way love Kim's dictatorial rule. The peace was achieved through a show of strength. After all, Trump wasn't the one who paid money to Kim in hopes he would stop. Instead, in response to Kim threatening the United States, Trump countered that brilliantly - saying that he had a bigger button, which works. While some may call this tweet "risky", it actually scared the North Korean dictator into asking for negotiations; after all, our military is superior, and they don't want to risk a war against us while we're strong.

Here's an analogy: North Korea is the bully. America pre-2017 was the victim. America now is the victim willing to stand up for itself.

I am well aware of Trump's tweets against "rocket man." After the summit however, Trump seems to developed an affinity for the dictator.

Not to mention the claim he "beat" ISIS is just downright laughable. The fight against them has been going on since the beginning of the mileneum against numerous nations across the globe but, sure, he can come on in and claim credit if he wants. Nevermind the fact that they arent defested in the first place, only the lands they officially control have been mostly retaken. They are still alive and well as an insurgency.

[Proctopeo]

A few people associated with a broad tent like ANTIFA do a few asinine things and they're domestic terrorists, but the alt-right gets a free pass when it comes to actual murders and calls for genocide.

Sounds about right, fucking christ.

The "alt-right" is even less organized and clearly defined than Antifa. We've left "general template for a street gang" territory and entered "Oprah Winfrey giving out prizes" territory.

[Ifreann]

A few people associated with a broad tent like ANTIFA do a few asinine things and they're domestic terrorists, but the alt-right gets a free pass when it comes to actual murders and calls for genocide.

Sounds about right, fucking christ.

The "alt-right" is even less organized and clearly defined than Antifa. We've left "general template for a street gang" territory and entered "Oprah Winfrey giving out prizes" territory.

The Proud Boys have charter and ranks and a leader, well, I think they've switch to multiple leaders since they ditched McInnes.

[Proctopeo]

The "alt-right" is even less organized and clearly defined than Antifa. We've left "general template for a street gang" territory and entered "Oprah Winfrey giving out prizes" territory.

The Proud Boys have charter and ranks and a leader, well, I think they've switch to multiple leaders since they ditched McInnes.

The Proud Boys are not equivalent to the entire general concept of the "alt-right".

[Ifreann]

The Proud Boys have charter and ranks and a leader, well, I think they've switch to multiple leaders since they ditched McInnes.

The Proud Boys are not equivalent to the general concept of the "alt-right".

Yup. Just a very definitely organised street gang.

[Proctopeo]

The Proud Boys are not equivalent to the general concept of the "alt-right".

Yup. Just a very definitely organised street gang.

You missed the entire point and meaning of my post by an entire astronomical unit, congratulations.

Do you even have a point here, or are you just throwing shit at the wall?

[Strahcoin]

The alt-right is rightfully condemned by many, and we have alt-right murderers in prison.

When the President mentioned that we have "fine people on many sides," or when several GOP congressmen have openly espoused ideas I would consider far-right, I don't think it's a stretch to say that the GOP's condemnations of the alt-right are half-assed at best, and completely disingenuous at worst.

The alt-right is not right-wing. The alt-right believes in a government-planned economy, diving the nation based on ethnicity, suppressing opposing ideologies, and prohibiting immigration. The right believes in a free-market capitalist economy, uniting the nation's people as members of that nation, supporting the freedom of speech, and allowing immigration based on merit. Not to mention that fascism was founded by a student of Marx...

1. Seriously, he has. While he hasn't obliterated every member of ISIS, he has certainly defeated them and liberated the territory they occupied.
2. My family is somewhere in the middle-class. My father said taxes have been lowered by Trump, even though it wasn't perfect. (Also, about half of Congress, the entity that writes the tax codes, is dominated by left-wing Democrats, so that would explain why income taxes aren't flat yet.) Moreover, the "rich" (aka those who work hard) were unfairly taxed before.
3. Then how do you explain this?
4. That "screaming like a spoiled toddler" is precisely why the hard-working Americans voted for him. They wanted someone who consistently spoke the truth from his heart, not someone who pretends to care for the people while accepting and paying dirty money to look good. (And must I say that CNN/MSNBC are the true screamers?)


The good things he did solved critical issues at the time. Also, remember that Congress has to write most of the bills before Trump passes them. Therefore, lots of negotiations were necessary.


I'm not entirely sure where you got that idea (probably from the fake news media), but Trump does not in any way love Kim's dictatorial rule. The peace was achieved through a show of strength. After all, Trump wasn't the one who paid money to Kim in hopes he would stop. Instead, in response to Kim threatening the United States, Trump countered that brilliantly - saying that he had a bigger button, which works. While some may call this tweet "risky", it actually scared the North Korean dictator into asking for negotiations; after all, our military is superior, and they don't want to risk a war against us while we're strong.

Here's an analogy: North Korea is the bully. America pre-2017 was the victim. America now is the victim willing to stand up for itself.

I am well aware of Trump's tweets against "rocket man." After the summit however, Trump seems to developed an affinity for the dictator.

Wait, I thought world peace was good...

I am well aware of Trump's tweets against "rocket man." After the summit however, Trump seems to developed an affinity for the dictator.

Not to mention the claim he "beat" ISIS is just downright laughable. The fight against them has been going on since the beginning of the mileneum against numerous nations across the globe but, sure, he can come on in and claim credit if he wants. Nevermind the fact that they arent defested in the first place, only the lands they officially control have been mostly retaken. They are still alive and well as an insurgency.

ISIS members still remain, but Trump has done so well that ISIS is effectively "defeated". While eliminating ISIS altogether would be ideal, the fact that Trump has gotten far closer than presidents before him is applaudable by itself.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

When the President mentioned that we have "fine people on many sides," or when several GOP congressmen have openly espoused ideas I would consider far-right, I don't think it's a stretch to say that the GOP's condemnations of the alt-right are half-assed at best, and completely disingenuous at worst.

The alt-right is not right-wing. The alt-right believes in a government-planned economy, diving the nation based on ethnicity, suppressing opposing ideologies, and prohibiting immigration. The right believes in a free-market capitalist economy, uniting the nation's people as members of that nation, supporting the freedom of speech, and allowing immigration based on merit. Not to mention that fascism was founded by a student of Marx...

I am well aware of Trump's tweets against "rocket man." After the summit however, Trump seems to developed an affinity for the dictator.

Wait, I thought world peace was good...

Not to mention the claim he "beat" ISIS is just downright laughable. The fight against them has been going on since the beginning of the mileneum against numerous nations across the globe but, sure, he can come on in and claim credit if he wants. Nevermind the fact that they arent defested in the first place, only the lands they officially control have been mostly retaken. They are still alive and well as an insurgency.

ISIS members still remain, but Trump has done so well that ISIS is effectively "defeated". While eliminating ISIS altogether would be ideal, the fact that Trump has gotten far closer than presidents before him is applaudable by itself.

You can have peace without saying you effectively love Kim. That is a stupid excuse.